Delhi High Court
Manushi Sangathan, Delhi vs Govt. Of Delhi And Ors. on 24 May, 2013
Author: S. Ravindra Bhat
Bench: S. Ravindra Bhat, S. Muralidhar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
W.P. (C) 4572 of 2007
MANUSHI SANGATHAN, DELHI ..... Petitioner
Versus
GOVT OF DELHI AND ORS. .....Respondents
with
W.P. (C) 8580 of 2009
INITIATIVE FOR TRANSPORATION AND DEVELOPMENT
PROGRAMMES ..... Petitioner
Versus
MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF DELHI AND
ORS. .....Respondents
And
CONT. CAS (C) 564 of 2010
MANUSHI SANGATHAN ..... Petitioner
Versus
P.K. PANDA AND ORS. .....Respondents
Appearances:
Ms. Indira Unninayar with Ms. Kirat Randhawa and Mr. Narayan
Krishan, Advocates for Petitioners in WP (C) 4572 of 2007.
Mr. V.K. Tandon and Mr. Yogesh Saini, Advocates for PWD and
GNCTD.
W.P. (C) Nos. 4572 of 2007, 8580 of 2009 & Cont. Cas (C) 564 of 2010 Page 1 of 42
Mr. Sanjeev Ralli and Mr. Alpha Phiris Dayal, Advocates for Chandni
Chowk Vyapar Mandal.
Mr. Arun Birbal and Mr. D.K. Singh, Advocates for UTTIPEC.
Ms. Madhu Tewatia and Ms. Sidhi Arora, Advocates for MCD.
Mr. Rajiv Nanda, Addl. Standing Counsel, for Delhi Police.
Ms. Geetanjali Mohan with Ms. Mansi Gautam, Advocates for
Railways.
Mr. Nalin Sinha, Petitioner in person in W.P. (C) 8580 of 2009.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT
HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE S. MURALIDHAR
ORDER
24.05.2013
1. This order deals with two issues: one regarding provision of separate lanes in roads for non-motorised vehicles ('NMVs') and the second, the decongestion of the main Chandni Chowk thoroughfare.
NMV Lanes
2. To begin with it may be recalled that in the main writ petition i.e. W.P. (C) No. 4572 of 2007 was filed by Manushi Sangathan challenging the correctness of the decision of the Division Bench of this Court dated 26th July 2006 in Hem Raj v. Commissioner of Police [W.P.(C) No. 3419 of 1999] to the extent that it upheld the imposition by the Municipal Corporation of Delhi ('MCD') of a cap on the total number of rickshaw licences that could be issued and the restrictions placed on persons other than owners plying W.P. (C) Nos. 4572 of 2007, 8580 of 2009 & Cont. Cas (C) 564 of 2010 Page 2 of 42 rickshaws. The Full Bench of this Court delivered a judgment on 10th February 2010 by which the decision in Hem Raj was overruled and it was held inter alia that the cap imposed by the MCD in respect of cycle rickshaws licences which could be issued was arbitrary. The 'owner-plier' policy embodied in the proviso to Bye-law 3(1) of the MCD Bye-laws governing rickshaws was declared as arbitrary and void and the said proviso was quashed.
3. Manushi Sangathan had also questioned the restriction placed on rickshaws plying on arterial roads. While declining to hold the ban to be illegal the Full Bench observed that "the matter requires thorough review and consideration of all aspects." The Full Bench issued the following directions:
"(i) The Govt. of NCT of Delhi, the MCD, the Delhi Development Authority, the Delhi Police, shall constitute a special task force to explore all the questions pertaining to road traffic in Delhi, with the objective of minimizing congestion, reducing pollution levels of motor vehicles, and ensuring equitable access to all classes of vehicles that ply on the roads, including non-motorized transport such as bicycles and cycle rickshaws. The Government of NCT of Delhi shall issue a Notification within 6 weeks, for this purpose, and also accord adequate budgetary support for this purpose.
(ii) The above Task Force shall be constituted by the Chief Secretary. Its membership shall comprise of a traffic expert, to be nominated by the Govt. of NCT of Delhi; a nominee of the Commissioner of Police, Delhi, with at least five years experience in traffic management, and not below the rank of Deputy Commissioner of Police; a W.P. (C) Nos. 4572 of 2007, 8580 of 2009 & Cont. Cas (C) 564 of 2010 Page 3 of 42 town planning expert nominated by the Delhi Development Authority, with experience, and familiarity in respect of road management aspects pertaining to planning; two nominees from the private sector, or drawn from autonomous institutions, with experience and expertise in road management and traffic flows in large metropolises; a nominee with expertise in air pollution control, drawn from a voluntary agency or non-government organization, and a nominee from a non-government organization with experience in the field of environment and urban livelihood. The Principal Secretary, Transport of the Govt.
of NCT of Delhi, shall be the member-Secretary of the Task Force;
(iii) The Task force shall review all aspects pertaining to traffic flow, registration of vehicles, restrictions in respect of vehicular movement (of all classes of vehicles - heavy, light, private, non-motorized,) which would include review and consideration of all existing policies, and regulatory measures, and make such recommendations, as would promote the objectives of ensuring equitable access to all kinds of vehicles, minimizing harmful impact on the environment, smoothening the flow of traffic, and at the same time accommodate the concerns of all interests. The Task Force may also make interim reports, and recommend pilot projects, to consider feasibility of any new practice or policy.
(iv) The Task Force shall consider the views of all those interested in presenting them, with a view to take a broader perspective. To achieve this end, the Force shall place its viewpoints on the public domain, and invite comments or objections on its proposals, which it shall duly consider, W.P. (C) Nos. 4572 of 2007, 8580 of 2009 & Cont. Cas (C) 564 of 2010 Page 4 of 42 and in the process, may also hear any interested party or parties.
(v) Any proposal which the Government of NCT or the MCD, or any other local authority or agencies wishes to implement shall be notified to the general public for information (and comments and views, objections or suggestions, as the case may be). After duly considering such views, the proposals shall be implemented, provided however, that some reasonable transition time is granted to all concerned persons, including commuters, vehicle owners, licensees, etc.
(vi) The first Meeting of the Task Force shall be held in eight weeks from today.
(vii) These Petitions shall be listed on 7 th April, 2010 before a Division Bench, to monitor the progress of implementation of this judgment, and thereafter the matter shall be so listed on the 2nd Wednesday of each month.
(viii) This Court issues a continuing mandamus, for the above purpose."
4. The question of providing a dedicated "non-motorised cycle/cycle rickshaw lane" was specifically considered by the Full Bench in paras 70 to 73 of the judgment dated 10th February 2010. It was noted that even the Delhi Traffic Police agreed that "the Master Plan dictates that roads should be segregated" and that "separate bicycle tracks are provided". The Full Bench noted that "road management cannot mean prioritisation of access to only one class of vehicles, particularly when there is significant body of W.P. (C) Nos. 4572 of 2007, 8580 of 2009 & Cont. Cas (C) 564 of 2010 Page 5 of 42 evidence that such class contributes to clogging of roads". It was noted that there was a propensity for cars to appropriate a lion's share of the road space available in Delhi. The Court observed that while it was not inclined to disturb the zoning restriction or the ban (on cycle rickshaws plying on arterial roads), "this is a fit case where the authorities should explore all options to reduce road congestion, and consider all proposals, from an overall, or holistic perspective."
5. On 16th August 2010 Cont. Case (C) No. 564 of 2010 was filed by the Petitioner stating that the operative directions of the judgment of Full Bench were being flouted by the Delhi Police and that action should be taken against it by initiating contempt proceedings. The Division Bench passed the following order in the CM No. 6986 of 2010 in Writ Petition (C) No. 4572 of 2007 and the companion Writ Petition (C) No. 8580 of 2009 (Initiative for Transportation & Development Programmes v. MCD) on 18th August 2010:
"CM No. 6986 of 2010Though various assertions have been made and numerous grievances have been put forth, yet Mr. Prashant Bhushan, learned counsel for the Petitioner submitted that the task force may be directed to file its response with regard to what steps have been taken to treat Vikas Marg, Shyama Prasad Mukherjee Marg and Bhishma Pitama Marg to introduce the pilot project for providing lanes for the non- motorized vehicles.
Be it noted, by the virtue of the order passed by the Full Bench, the Chief Secretary is appointed as the Chairman of the Special Task Force.W.P. (C) Nos. 4572 of 2007, 8580 of 2009 & Cont. Cas (C) 564 of 2010 Page 6 of 42
We would like the Chief Secretary to see whether the pilot project in respect of the aforesaid three roads have been implemented or there is any kind of impediment from Delhi Police or from any quarter.
Let a Status report supported by an affidavit of the person who is delegated to do so by the Chief Secretary, the Chairman of the Special Task Force, be filed within a period of four weeks.
Matter be listed on 20th October, 2010."
6. On 1st December 2010, presentations were made in the Court of the further developments. In the order passed on that day, the Court noted that the authorities had undertaken to file affidavit. On 11th February 2011 the Court directed the report of the Special Task Force ('STF') to be filed.
7. In the meanwhile, the judgment of the Full Bench was challenged by the MCD by filing SLP (Civil) No. 9960 of 2010 (Municipal Corporation of Delhi v. Manushi Sangathan) in the Supreme Court. On 8th November 2011, the Supreme Court observed "since this Court had already rejected the Petitioner's prayer for interim relief, we deem it appropriate to request the High Court to continue to effectively monitor the implementation of the directions contained in the impugned order." Ultimately, the Supreme Court dismissed the aforementioned SLP of the MCD on 2nd April 2012.
8. On 9th November 2011 the Court was informed that the STF had submitted its report. The Court then directed the MCD "to take steps pursuant to the report submitted by the STF and to file its status report within four weeks".
W.P. (C) Nos. 4572 of 2007, 8580 of 2009 & Cont. Cas (C) 564 of 2010 Page 7 of 429. The major recommendations made by the STF in its report on the issues under consideration were as follows:
"21 (c) Non-motorized modes of Transport need to be encouraged being highly suitable for short and medium trips and an Environmental friendly mode of Transport. Real time projects need to be taken up to study the impact of measures taken to promote the NMV modes of transport and pedestrianisation. Accordingly, some of the projects have been recommended in para 7 of this report and their implementation needs to be followed up by the concerned agencies.
Action: MCD, NDMC, PWD, DIMTS, Transport Department and UTTIPEC."
"(m) The Street Design Guidelines prepared by the UTTIPEC for non-motorized vehicles and pedestrian pathways as well as its guidelines for the Integrated Transport Corridors (BRT) sections and bus lanes should be followed by the all concerned departments/agencies.
Action: MCD, NDMC, PWD, Transport Department, GNCTD and DIMTS."
10. In its report, the STF discussed the cycle rickshaw policy and was of the view that provisions of the Master Plan for Delhi 2012 ('MPD-2021') need to be followed. This included optimal use of existing road network and further that "all arterial roads will be restructured to allow for smooth and safe flow of buses and non-motorised transport to minimise pollution and congestion". The MPD-2021 recommended that on all arterial roads fully segregated cycle tracks should be provided with provision for safe parking in 'park and ride' W.P. (C) Nos. 4572 of 2007, 8580 of 2009 & Cont. Cas (C) 564 of 2010 Page 8 of 42 lots. As regards specific areas like the Walled City/Chandni Chowk/Sadar Bazar/Karol Bagh/Lajpat Nagar and Trans Yamuna Area, the STF opined that "the use of cycles/rickshaw as a non-motorised mode of transport should be consciously planned along with pedestrianisation." The STF was of the view that "the UTTIPEC needs to decide about the plying of rickshaws on roads as per MPD-2021 and the police cannot take that decision under the Police Act." The STF after a number of discussions and many presentations on different drafts of the statute proposed by the MCD, the police and Manushi Sangathan decided to set up a sub group to reconcile the differences and engage a drafting consultant from the Law Department of the GNCTD for that purpose. The draft of the Delhi Non Motorised Vehicles Bill, 2011 was enclosed with the report of the STF. Of the 14 members of the STF, 3 were co-opted subsequently and 1 retired. The remaining 11 members signed the final report of the STF.
11. This Bench has been monitoring the implementation of the directions of the Full Bench. On 18th November 2011 the Court considered the recommendations made by the STF in its final report and passed the following order:
"W.P. (C) 4572/2007 and 8580/2009 After hearing counsel and considering the materials made available at this stage, this Court is of the opinion that following directions need to be issued:-
(1) Govt. of NCT of Delhi through its Transport Department shall file a comprehensive Action Taken Report. In this process, it shall duly consult and involve all the concerned W.P. (C) Nos. 4572 of 2007, 8580 of 2009 & Cont. Cas (C) 564 of 2010 Page 9 of 42 stakeholders who are mentioned in paragraph-21A - M of the report of the recommendations of Special Task Force of April, 2011 constituted pursuant to this Court's main judgment passed on 10.02.2010.
(2) Govt. of NCT of Delhi shall also place on record the report of the pilot projects it claims to have introduced by way of implementation of the judgment of this Court vis-a-
vis introduction of non-motorized roads in various segment of the roads in Delhi.
(3) The response of the Delhi Police in the form of an affidavit, to the recommendations of the Special Task Force, shall also be placed on record. We note that Mr. Najmi Waziri, learned counsel for the GNCTD is also representing that agency before the Court.
(4) At least two experts who participated in the deliberations of the STF, particularly, the official representative of the UTPAC and Mr. Pradeep Sachdeva who is the member of the Special Task Force and the representative of the Transport Department, as well as DCP (Traffic) shall be present to assist the Court on the next date of hearing.
List on 9th December, 2011, at 02:15 PM."
12. On 9th December 2011 presentations were made before the Court by Mr. Pradeep Sachdeva and Ms. Romy Roy from United Traffic and Transportation Infrastructure (Planning & Engineering) Centre (UTTIPEC). The Court was also shown the 'Street Design Guidelines' ('SDG') prepared by UTTIPEC specifically for Delhi.
13. The SDG in Chapter 4 deals specifically with 'Street Hierarchy of Delhi with categorization by Function'. It notes that the MPD-2021 specifies that W.P. (C) Nos. 4572 of 2007, 8580 of 2009 & Cont. Cas (C) 564 of 2010 Page 10 of 42 "all roads should be made pedestrian, disabled and bicycle friendly." In particular, it mandates introduction of "cycle tracks, pedestrian and disabled friendly features in arterial and sub-arterial roads". It proposes the implementation of a Bus Rapid Transit System ('BRT') in a phased manner on all roads with right of way ('ROW') greater than 30 meters. For primary arterial roads with ROW between 60 and 80 meters, the SDG talks of "cycle/NMV tracks apart from bus ways for BRTs, motorised lanes and service lanes". In both the aforementioned types of roads it suggests segregated cycle tracks with minimum 2.5 m width. The SDG sets out the cross-sections of various forms of roads including other primary arterial roads (45 meters), primary collector roads (30 to 40 meters) and secondary collector roads (18 to 24 meters) indicating the segregation into the main carriageway, lanes for cycle track and the side walk. In other words, the SDG demonstrates how it is possible to provide for NMV lanes in roads of various widths.
14. Chapter 5 of the SDG talks of 'Design Toolkit: Mandatory Components'. Section 05A is devoted to 'segregated cycle and NMT Tracks'. It sets out the basic parameters for cycle tracks, pedestrian and disabled friendly features in arterial and sub-arterial roads as mandated by the MPD-2021. The minimum width for single lane movement is 2.0 meters. It states that NMT lanes are meant for "bicycles, cycle-rickshaws, hand pushcarts, hawker carts, animal drawn carts, etc." It further notes:
"NMVs are the second most vulnerable group of road users and therefore must be clearly segregated from faster moving motorized traffic, especially on Roads designated for motorized speeds of ....W.P. (C) Nos. 4572 of 2007, 8580 of 2009 & Cont. Cas (C) 564 of 2010 Page 11 of 42
The NMV lane should be constructed with smooth- finished cement Concrete or Asphalt in order to ensure a low maintenance and smooth riding surface. In the absence of this, cyclists will tend to move into the MV lanes which may be more comfortable.
Minimum Dimension of NMV Track is 2.5 M. NMV Lanes or Tracks should be located on both sides of the street.
A 0.7 M landscaped buffer should be kept between NMV and MV lanes in order to maximize the speed, efficiency and capacity of the NMV Lane."
15. The geometric guidelines for cycle tacks have been given in Section 06F. Chapter 6 of the SDG specifies the 'Additional Components' including traffic calming, paving variations at crossings, stop signs, intersections, Chicane, public art, street furniture, educative signage etc.
16. As noted earlier the STF has in its final report specifically recommended the adoption of the SDG. The preface to the SDG states that the Governing Body of the UTTIPEC under the Chairmanship of the Lt. Governor ('LG') had approved the 'Pedestrian Design Guidelines' ('PDG') on 24th November 2009. The PDG was discussed extensively at the meeting of the Working Group which suggested that the PDG be renamed as the SDG after incorporating the suggestions of the Working Group. The final revised SDG was approved by the Governing Body of the UTTIPEC at its 27th meeting held on 21st November 2010. It can, therefore, confidently be stated that the SDG approved by the UTTIPEC for Delhi is the report of an official expert body prepared after several rounds of consultations and deliberations. The W.P. (C) Nos. 4572 of 2007, 8580 of 2009 & Cont. Cas (C) 564 of 2010 Page 12 of 42 SDG also provides the norms and the method by which NMVs can be recommended by the STF appointed by this Court for adoption by all agencies, there is no need for any further examination of the issue any further by any other expert body. Considering that more than three years have elapsed since the judgment of the Full Bench, which has been affirmed by the Supreme Court, this Court finds no justification for any further delay in the concerned agencies taking measures to operationalise the recommendations of the STF and the SDG on provision of separate lanes for NMVs in particular.
17. The Court issued specific directions on 23rd December 2011 regarding the pilot project at Shyama Prasad Mukherjee Marg ('SPM Marg') on which a separate lane has been earmarked for NMVs. On 13th January 2013 after hearing the parties the following further directions were issued by the Court:
"Having regarding to the circumstances which this Court has discerned today, the following directions are issued:-
(i) The MCD shall in coordination with the Delhi Traffic Police ensure that all obstructions, as pointed to the MCD by the Delhi Traffic Police in its letter dated 11.01.2012 (referred to in para-4 of its status report), at the relevant points where the NMV lane has been considerably narrowed, are removed within two weeks from today.
(ii) The MCD shall ensure that appropriate signages are displayed in sufficient number at the entry and other prominent places in the NMVs. We emphasize here that the MCD shall place pictorial signages which can convey the message more effectively. The Hindi signages will be appropriately corrected as well.W.P. (C) Nos. 4572 of 2007, 8580 of 2009 & Cont. Cas (C) 564 of 2010 Page 13 of 42
(iii) The Delhi Traffic Police shall take steps and issue appropriate Notification (s) clearly segregating NMV lanes on the SPM Marg and indicating that use of that lane is not permissible for motorized traffic. The Notification (s) should be displayed at the entry and exit points at the NMV lanes themselves. Counsel for the Delhi Traffic Police assures that the such Notification (s) would be issued within two weeks.
(iv) The MCD shall ensure that marshalls deployed by it can be identified easily by providing them with distinct clothing or gear. The Delhi Traffic Police shall ensure that sufficient policemen are deployed to ensure that the lane discipline is maintained and motorized vehicles do not enter the NMVs;
suitable action in accordance with law shall also be taken in the event of violation of the Notification (s). Ideally, the marshalls deployed by the MCD shall work in tandem with and as per the instructions of the personnel of the Delhi Traffic Police.
(v) There should be better coordination between the Delhi Traffic Police and the MCD. Each will nominate an officer who will hold joint meetings at regular intervals to monitor the implementation of the pilot project on the above lines."
18. At this stage it must be noted that the Delhi Traffic Police ('DTP') had been expressing reservations about the way the NMV lane has been provided on the SPM Marg. In an affidavit filed on 7th December 2011, the DCP (Traffic) stated that it was the view of the DTP that "rickshaws in Delhi should not be allowed on arterial and major roads unless additional road space is created. We are against taking away the portions of carriage ways for creation of rickshaw lanes on the existing arterial and main roads". The above affidavit was in response to the report of the STF that had examined the matter pursuant to the judgment dated 10th February 2010 of the Full W.P. (C) Nos. 4572 of 2007, 8580 of 2009 & Cont. Cas (C) 564 of 2010 Page 14 of 42 Bench. Certain suggestions were made by the DTP for introduction in the Non Motorised Vehicle Bill, 2007. A reference was made by the DTP to the letter dated 17th March 2011 sent by it to the Chief Secretary, GNCTD.
19. One of the reservations expressed by the DTP is that cycle-rickshaws are essentially meant to provide last mile connectivity to the commuters in terms of short and medium trips covering a minimum distance of 4 to 5 km. DTP states that they are not generally required to move on arterial and sub-arterial roads which are primarily meant for high speed and non-stop vehicles. As far as this objection is concerned, clearly the DTP is unwilling to accept the SDG as approved by UTTIPEC and recommended by the STF. The DTP makes no mention of the SDG at all which was approved by the UTTIPEC.
20. The next objection is that the DTP does not prefer creation of a NMV lane without creation of additional space on the existing arterial and sub- arterial roads due to pressure of other motorised vehicles and fast moving vehicles. As far as the above objection is concerned, the Full Bench had already emphasised how there should be equitable distribution of road space for all forms of traffic. The MPD-2021 is in the same vein. Roads in Delhi cannot be allowed to be dominated by motorised vehicles to the exclusion of other forms of transport. As SDG demonstrates, it is essential to cater to cycles and disabled friendly vehicles in street roads. The concerns about slowing down of motorised vehicular traffic has been accounted for in the SDG and deliberated upon by the STF in which there was representation of the DTP. In fact the Delhi Traffic Police itself points out how the number of motor vehicles on Delhi roads has increased from 5.61 lakhs in 1981 to W.P. (C) Nos. 4572 of 2007, 8580 of 2009 & Cont. Cas (C) 564 of 2010 Page 15 of 42 approximately 72 lakhs in 2011. It would have been understandable if the DTP had asked for a cap on the number of motorised vehicles being added to the Delhi roads on a daily or monthly basis. However, it does not hesitate to oppose creation of NMV lanes for cycle-rickshaws. The Court finds this approach of the DTP at variance with MPD-2021 as well as the SDG, as been approved by the UTTIPEC. DTP can suggest the means of increasing road space without edging out the NMVs altogether. DTP's suggestion regarding regulation of cycle-rickshaws registration has already been acted upon. Separate directions have been issued by this Court from time to time in that regard.
21. At the meeting of the STF held on 26th June 2010 the question of having NMV lanes on five road stretches was discussed. The five road stretches identified were:
"(a) Vikas Marg upto Karkardooma
(b) Shyama Prasad Mukherjee Marg (Lothian Bridge to MCD Headquarters).
(c) Existing BRT corridor from Ambedkar Nagar to Delhi Gate and its use by Rickshaws and cyclists to be observed.
(d) The work being done on Mall Road.
(e) The work being done in Chandni Chowk."
22. The pilot project at SPM Marg is being monitored by the Court. The Delhi Traffic Police has expressed its reservations about the manner in which the NMV lanes have been provided in SPM Marg. These reservations will W.P. (C) Nos. 4572 of 2007, 8580 of 2009 & Cont. Cas (C) 564 of 2010 Page 16 of 42 have to be accounted for by UTTIPEC and other agencies. It would not be a justification to not have an NMV lane at all on SPM Marg.
23. Further detailed directions were given by the Court as regards the SPM Marg on 2nd June 2012. In para 4 of the order, the Court held:
"We are of the considered opinion that the UTTIPEC guidelines having been shown and discussed, and accepted in principle previously, should be acted upon. We also notice that the Govt. of NCT of Delhi is committed to the UTTIPEC guidelines and has agreed to implement the same. No reservation of the kind being voiced now, is on record, in any of the previous UTTIPEC meetings, including those chaired by the Lieutenant Governor. We accordingly direct all the authorities and agencies, including the Delhi Police, to cooperate and ensure that the proposal suggested and shown in Court today by M/s. Pradeep Sachdeva and Associates are implemented within the shortest possible time and in any event within six weeks from today."
24. Detailed directions were also issued by the Court on 20th and 30th April 2012 as regards the decisions taken at the 34th meeting of the UTTIPEC as regards the pilot project at SPM Marg. At the 40th UTTIPEC governing body meeting held on 21st November 2012, the issue of providing NMV lanes for cycle rickshaws was taken up. The minutes note the objections of the DTP. Thereafter it ends as under:
"Hon'ble L.G. appreciated Traffic Police for reduction of fatal accidents on the NH-1 and some other major roads with the provision of traffic calming measures and agreed with the above observations with the direction that:
All concerned agencies to take action immediately.W.P. (C) Nos. 4572 of 2007, 8580 of 2009 & Cont. Cas (C) 564 of 2010 Page 17 of 42
New Delhi M.C. to complete the work immediately within a fixed time to make the condition of the roads and footpath etc. for safe and smooth movement of vehicles and pedestrians etc. Light poles and banners in front of traffic signals (junctions and pedestrian signals) should be removed and got functional immediately.
Auto-rickshaw availability to be raised on roads by Transport Deptt.
It was decided that rickshaws should not be allowed to ply on carriageways of arterial roads. It was also decided that the rickshaw stands need to be provided near Metro stations as per MMI checklist of UTTIPEC, while ensuring that the rickshaws do not start plying on the Carriageways of the arterial roads.
Hon'ble LG directed NDMC to finish off maintenance work on Outer circle of Connaught Place immediately."
25. The decision not to allow rickshaws to ply on carriageways of arterial roads appears to have been taken unilaterally by the LG without referring the issue back to the UTTIPEC. This decision apart from not respecting the democratised process put in place through the UTTIPEC (headed by the LG himself) is also at variance with the decision of the STF constituted by the Court. Also, such a decision has the potential of being interpreted as approving a ban on plying of cycle rickshaws on arterial roads that do not have a separate NMV lane. This is not consistent with the MPD-2021 provisions that urge the creation of equitable spaces for NMVs on roads. The decision taken by the LG also does not consider the possibilities demonstrated by the SDG of providing NMVs on arterial roads on which W.P. (C) Nos. 4572 of 2007, 8580 of 2009 & Cont. Cas (C) 564 of 2010 Page 18 of 42 rickshaws can ply. The Court finds the above decision unsustainable as it overlooks the decision making process put in place through the UTTIPEC and the STF. Accordingly, the Court sets aside the decision of the LG taken at the meeting of the UTTIPEC held on 21st November 2012 to the extent it disallows plying of cycle rickshaws on the carriageways of arterial roads. There cannot be such a blanket prohibition till such time separate NMV lanes for cycle rickshaws are provided on the carriageways of arterial roads. In other words, the prohibition of the plying of cycle rickshaws on the carriageway of an arterial road would be justified only if it is simultaneous with the creation of NMV lanes on such arterial road. Also, for such decision to be taken the matter will have to first be placed before the UTTIPEC.
26. The Court turns next to the issue of providing NMV lanes on other roads. As far as the main Chandni Chowk thoroughfare is concerned, it is being dealt with separately later in this order. As regards the Bhishma Pitama Marg, Deshbandhu Gupta Road and Vikas Marg the problem appears to be of inadequate regulation of traffic by the DTP. Wherever the width of the road is insufficient for clearly segregated lanes, some other method will have to be found out in consultation with the experts in the subject. If there is a will in the agencies to make the policy work they can certainly find out measures to do so. The STF held a meeting on 8th April 2013 in which question of NMV lanes was discussed. The decision taken at the said meeting reads as under:
"After deliberating on above issues and ascertaining the views of the members, it was decided that certain areas like Karol Bagh, Connaught Place, Nehru Place and Vikas Marg would be taken up as pilot projects for undertaking improvements in traffic movement of both motorized and non-motorized vehicles, decongesting these areas, W.P. (C) Nos. 4572 of 2007, 8580 of 2009 & Cont. Cas (C) 564 of 2010 Page 19 of 42 improving access to public transport, improving/providing pedestrian facilities and effective parking management. Ms. Paromita Roy, Dy. Director, UTTIPEC was requested to prepare draft plans containing details of the existing infrastructure, problem areas and possible solutions in consultation with the Secty.-cum-Commissioner (Tpt) for discussion in next meeting of the STF."
27. At the hearing on 25th April 2013, the Petitioners suggested that the following stretches of roads could be taken up for NMV lane segregation:
S.No. Road Stretch Distance
(Approx.)
Stretch From Chattarpur Metro Station 11 Km approx.
1 along Aurobindo Marg upto
Prithviraj Road
Stretch All major roads in Dwarka or Around 30 to 60+
2 Rohini to improve Metro Km
connectivity (will depend on
locality chosen and the nature
of its street network)
Stretch Mathura Road from MB Road 12 Km
3 to Lodhi Road
Stretch Ring Road (Mahatma Gandhi 45 Km approx.
4 Marg) from Azadpur
connecting to Dhaula Kuan,
AIIMS, Ashram and going
upto DU North Campus.
Stretch Outer Ring Road from Rao 13 Km approx.
5 Tula Ram Marg to Mathura
Road.
28. To avoid multiplicity of agencies taking overlapping decisions on the W.P. (C) Nos. 4572 of 2007, 8580 of 2009 & Cont. Cas (C) 564 of 2010 Page 20 of 42 issue, the Court directs a meeting of the STF and the UTTIPEC to be jointly convened by the LG within the next four weeks to exclusively consider the issue of providing NMV lanes on at least five arterial roads including the stretches suggested by the STF and the Petitioner as noted above. The DCP (Traffic) will participate in the meeting and the concerns expressed by the DTP will be discussed. It is made clear that the purpose of the meeting is not to decide whether to have NMV lanes but to lay down the detailed time plan for providing NMV lanes on arterial and other roads consistent with the SDG as approved by the UTTIPEC and recommended for adoption by the STF. The meeting will also assign responsibilities of the different civic agencies. If the meeting is inconclusive on the first day then the next meeting should be held consecutively within one week thereafter so that a final decision can be taken within a period of four weeks from today.
29. The approved and signed minutes of the joint meeting of the UTTIPEC and the STF as directed above will be placed on record by way of an affidavit before the next date of hearing.
Chandni Chowk
30. The Chandni Chowk Vyapar Mandal ('CCVM') filed CM No. 3422 of 2009 on 12th February 2009 seeking intervention. The concern expressed by CCVM was that there was no compliance with the several orders passed by the Court in regard to the plying of cycle rickshaws. The CCVM was permitted to intervene and it filed detailed written submissions on dated 6th July 2009. An additional affidavit was also filed by the CCVM on 17th November 2009 enclosing photographs showing the congestion at Chandni W.P. (C) Nos. 4572 of 2007, 8580 of 2009 & Cont. Cas (C) 564 of 2010 Page 21 of 42 Chowk. CCVM have also filed a synopsis on 9th December 2009 enclosing the traffic management plan of Chandni Chowk as prepared by the Central Road Research Institute ('CRRI') in January 2005. The CRRI report is titled 'Transport Systems Management Plan for Chandni Chowk Area'. Therein a reference is made to clause 12.7 of MPD-2021 dealing with "transportation for special areas which provides for introduction of battery operated buses on selected routes".
31. Subsequent to the Full Bench judgment dated 10th February 2010, when the Division Bench took up the task of monitoring of the implementation of the directions of the Full Bench, one of the issues considered was the decongestion of Chandni Chowk. CCVM filed CM No. 17940 of 2011 for directions to the Delhi Traffic Police for effective regulation of the traffic at Chandni Chowk road (from Red Fort to Fatehpuri Mosque). CCVM sought enforcement of the restrictions imposed on the plying of rickshaws on Chandni Chowk between 8 am and 8 pm brought about by a notification dated 25th May 2007 issued at the instance of the DTP. Notice was issued in the application on 18th November 2011. The reply filed on 7th December 2011 of the DTP confirmed that such a notification was indeed issued banning the plying of slow moving vehicles including cycle rickshaws, thelas, hand carts and animal driven vehicles between 8 a.m. and 8 p.m. on Chandni Chowk Road and four other roads. It was pointed out that five constables were deployed exclusively for proper regulation of the cycle rickshaws on Chandni Chowk Road from Red Fort to Fatehpuri Mosque. It was further stated as under:
W.P. (C) Nos. 4572 of 2007, 8580 of 2009 & Cont. Cas (C) 564 of 2010 Page 22 of 42"However, cycle rickshaw is required to provide last mile connectivity to the commuters in terms of short and medium trips. The old aged people, school going children and ladies having goods particularly require the cycle rickshaw in the area of Walled City in Delhi. Apart from this, there are narrow lanes and no other mode of transport is available to reach the destination. Hence, the people prefer use of the only viable mode of transport i.e. cycle rickshaws in Chandni Chowk area. In view of this necessity the Delhi Police is actively considering the withdrawal of the aforesaid notification dated 25th May 2007."
32. In its submission to the Court on 11th January 2012, the Petitioner pointed out that the restrictions placed by the notification dated 25th May 2007 were contrary to MPD-2021 that was notified on 7th February 2007. It therefore prayed for withdrawal of the said notification. On 13th August 2012, the Delhi Police was asked to inform the Court as to how it proposed to deal with the issue of congestion in Chandni Chowk. On 28th September 2012 the following order was passed in regard to Chandni Chowk:
"Chandni Chowk Learned counsel relies upon a set of photograph and contends that Chandni Chowk area is extremely congested. The photographs present a very dismal picture. The traffic on the entire road seems to be in a chaotic condition. The photographs also reveal grave challenges to the safety and wellbeing of the road users particularly school going children and the elderly pedestrians. Clearly there is no traffic management plan that is operational. Mr. Najmi Waziri, learned standing counsel for GNCTD, submits that in view of the need for urgent remedial steps, the Delhi Traffic W.P. (C) Nos. 4572 of 2007, 8580 of 2009 & Cont. Cas (C) 564 of 2010 Page 23 of 42 Police will work out and implement a traffic management plan for Chandni Chowk in a phased manner in consultation with the concerned parties. He states that a meeting of the Delhi Police with the petitioners, the representatives of the MCD, the Chandni Chowk Sarv Vyapar Mandal, M/s Choudhary Transport and other stakeholders would be held for this purpose in the office of the concerned DCP (North), Tara Chand Mathur Marg, on 3rd October, 2012 at 2:00 PM."
33. At the hearing on 12th October 2012, the Court was informed that a meeting was held between various interested parties including GNCTD, Delhi Police, MCD and UTTIPEC. The Court was informed by the MCD that the Parade Ground parking facility had to be made operational. The following directions were issued:
"In these circumstances, counsel for MCD shall report to the Court on the next date of hearing as to when the parking facility at Parade Ground shall be made operational. Govt. of NCT of Delhi and the MCD shall also report to the Court as to the time frame within which the multi level parking at Gandhi Ground would be developed. The following suggestions of CCSVM shall be considered by MCD and the Traffic Police and response given on the next date of hearing: -
(i) Multi level parking at Gandhi Ground should be developed after Parade ground parking starts operation.
(ii) Entry and exit gates of Gandhi Ground parking be interchanged.
(iii) Garbage (Kuda Dalav) should be removed from Fountain.W.P. (C) Nos. 4572 of 2007, 8580 of 2009 & Cont. Cas (C) 564 of 2010 Page 24 of 42
(iv) Faulty signals/blinkers at Fountain, Town Hall be got operational.
(v) Autos plying point to point should be stopped.
(vi) Parade Ground Parking be started.
(vii) Parking of cars in the main Chandni Chowk be banned.
(viii) Separate lane for rickshaws be made.
(ix) Commercial parking in Chandni Chowk, Katra Nil etc. be stopped.
(x) Three foot over bridges at Sis Ganj Gurdwara, Fatehpuri and starting of Chandni Chowk be constructed for the convenience of pedestrians.
Mr. Vijay Panjwani, learned counsel for Chandni Chowk Green Bus Sewa (CCGBS) has suggested that in addition to the above, authorities should explore the possibility of earmarking space in the existing car park behind Red Fort opposite Kotwali exclusively for the traders. In that event, the CCGBS is willing to ferry the traders to the Chandni Chowk between 10 and 11 am, on Mondays to Saturdays to facilitate their movement. This suggestion shall also be considered and an appropriate response given to the Court on the next date both by the MCD and the Traffic Police.
On the next date of hearing, the concerned Zonal Deputy Commissioner of the MCD shall be present. In addition, a senior officer of the same or higher rank having authority from the Headquarters of the MCD shall be present to assist the Court, if required. The DCP (Traffic) of the concerned Zone shall also remain present."
34. On 9th November 2012, the Court was informed that a separate corporation called Shahjahanabad Redevelopment Corporation ('SRDC') had W.P. (C) Nos. 4572 of 2007, 8580 of 2009 & Cont. Cas (C) 564 of 2010 Page 25 of 42 been constituted and that Chandni Chowk was within its jurisdiction. The following directions were then issued:
"We have heard counsel for the parties and also considered the affidavits of the Delhi Police and the MCD.
This Court is of the view that the Shahjahanabad Redevelopment Corporation (SRDC) should undertake, if not already done, a detailed study and come up with viable plan to decongest the Chandni Chowk area in consultation with the necessary stake holders and agencies including UTTIPEC. The SRDC and UTTIPEC would obviously take into account relevant factors, such as the number of vehicles which ply and are parked in Chandni Chowk area, the overall parking capacity, the overall traffic flow pattern and the space required for decongesting the traffic and the need for restricting the road to one way traffic during certain hours. This Court had issued the notice to UTTIPEC on 28th September, 2012, but no one appears on its behalf. Issue fresh notice without process fee to the UTTIPEC, for the next date.
The SRDC will present to the Court its report on the above lines on the next date, i.e. 14th December, 2012."
35. At the hearing on 14th December 2012, the Court was informed that SRDC had not submitted any traffic plan to the UTTIPEC. Consequently fresh notice was issued to the SRDC for compliance of the directions. At the hearing on 17th January 2013, reference was made to the minutes of the meeting of the UTTIPEC dated 31st March 2011 and 27th March 2012 and the issue of pedestrianisation of Chandni Chowk. The Court was shown 'Chandni Chowk Redevelopment Plan: Red Fort to Fateh Puri Masjid Road W.P. (C) Nos. 4572 of 2007, 8580 of 2009 & Cont. Cas (C) 564 of 2010 Page 26 of 42 Stretch' prepared by Abhimanyu Dalal, Architect for the MCD as well as Council of Science and Industrial Research ('CSIR') dated 20th May 2011. It showed that as of now there are footpaths of 3 and 3.5 m on either side of the Chandni Chowk carriageway. A median divides the two 10 to 11 m wide carriageways. The redevelopment plan shown to the Court proposed a 15 m wide footpath on one side and a 6.5 m one on the other. There were to be only two lanes in the main carriageway. One, was an NMV lane 3.9 m wide for bicycles and rickshaws and the other, a 2.5 m wide bus lane. A utility service tunnel running beneath the road was proposed.
36. The CRRI report of January 2005 showed that as of the date of the said report a total of 45,000 vehicles used the Chandni Chowk Road between 6 a.m and 6 p.m. and 45% of the traffic consisted of cycle rickshaws, 90% thereof being passenger rickshaws. Cars, two wheelers and auto rickshaws were 10%, 15% and 15% respectively while cycles constituted the remaining 10%. Significantly, it was mentioned that "the carriageway earmarked for cycle rickshaws has become a haven for parking of scooters and encroachment by the street side hawkers. The CRRI report pointed out that most of the fast moving traffic was towards the parking lots at Gandhi Maidan and Church Mission Road. A study of the cycle rickshaw flow showed that it became maximum at around 10 a.m. and remained constant till 6 p.m. Most of the shoppers were using cycle rickshaws. The heavy movement of cycle rickshaws (above 1500 per hour in each direction) was from the Fountain to Fatehpuri Mosque and was attributable to shoppers. The side roads leading to Chandni Chowk also showed a similar traffic flow pattern.
W.P. (C) Nos. 4572 of 2007, 8580 of 2009 & Cont. Cas (C) 564 of 2010 Page 27 of 4237. By an affidavit dated 9th November 2012, the MCD informed the Court that the Parade Ground parking was opened to the public free of cost with effect from 1st November 2012. The multi-level parking on Gandhi Maidan was expected to be ready early in 2013. At the meeting of the UTTIPEC held on 4th March 2011(the minutes of which were circulated under cover of a letter dated 31st March 2011) the following proposal regarding Chandni Chowk was discussed:
"Chandni Chowk - The entire Chandni Chowk Road from Netaji Subhash Marg to Fateh Puri has been proposed for Pedestrianisation with the provision for:-
i) 6 mtr. Carriage way road for 2 way movements for Public Transport (Golf cart and Tram etc.), Emergency vehicles and Cyclists.
ii) Cycle Rickshaw movement & Motor Vehicular movement/parking to be prohibited on this road.
iii) Chandni Chowk Road will be closed for private Motor Vehicular (MV) traffic from 9.00 A.M. to 9.00 P.M.
iv) 4 parking sites (existing/proposed) around Chandni Chowk area will provide the parking facilities. Existing On-Street Parking (approx 300 cars) will not be allowed after the implementation of the proposal. However, high parking charges based on circle rate/market rate of land as per the City level policy/Area level policy finalised/decided by the Govt. Will be imposed and implemented by introducing Parking Meters to encourage Short Term Parking and discourage Long Term Parking.
v) Feeder services from the parking sites to Chandni Chowk will be introduced as a 'park and ride' facilities to private car owners or the public transport mode introduced W.P. (C) Nos. 4572 of 2007, 8580 of 2009 & Cont. Cas (C) 564 of 2010 Page 28 of 42 in Chandni Chowk area will be extended to cover these parking sites."
38. The observations in regard to the above proposal were as under:
"(a) Proposed 6 mtr. Carriageway reserved for Public Transport (Golf Cart/Trams etc.) and emergency vehicle movement on Chandni Chowk will not be adequate which may be increased to 6.6 mtr. This should be also segregated from the Pedestrian Plazas on both sides with the provision of Mountable Kerb of 4''height.
b) North-south connectivity to be provided between Delhi Railway Station and the Chawri Bazar and surrounding areas falling on the southern part of Chandni Chowk. A circulation plan showing the movement pattern of all vehicles and Pedestrians, Parking areas and feeder system with appropriate design measures for entry/exit points on Chandni Chowk be prepared for effective Traffic Management of the scheme area.
c) Regarding access to Gurudwara parking, Project Engineer, MCD clarified that Stakeholders' meetings were organized by them explaining the proposal. Minutes of the meetings will be submitted by MCD. However, further Stakeholders' meeting involving all will be held again after the finalization/approval of the project by the Governing Body.
d) Existing On-Street parking of buses on H.C. Sen Marg to be shifted to Dungle ground (existing MCD parking site) opposite to the Old Delhi Railway Station after the MCD office is shifted, which was agreed by the MCD Project Engineer and Sr. Manager, DTC."
....
k) A joint site inspection for S.P. Mukherjee Marg will be held by the Working Group to resolve the issues/concerns of Delhi Traffic Police and General Secretary, Vyapar Manda, Chandni Chowk for which the detail Street W.P. (C) Nos. 4572 of 2007, 8580 of 2009 & Cont. Cas (C) 564 of 2010 Page 29 of 42 Design proposal of S.P. Mukherjee Marg to be immediately submitted to UTTIPEC by the MCD as per the decision of the Governing Body on 30th July 2010".
39. The other decision taken at the meeting regarding Chandni Chowk was "battery operated buses and other para transport modes will be allowed on the Pedestrian Street of Chandni Chowk".
40. At the meeting of the UTTIPEC governing body held on 28th February 2012 (the minutes of which were circulated on 27th March 2012) the question of redevelopment project of Chandni Chowk was taken up. Para 6 of the minutes reads as under:
"vi) Re-development Project of Chandni Chowk.
(MCD/Traffic Police) File No. F.6(109)09/UTTIPEC Background The proposal of integration of Shahjahanabad and New Delhi and Urban Design proposal consisting of overall Traffic management proposal of INTACH, S.P. Mukherjee Marg, Netaji Subhash Marg and Darya Ganj and feeder transport net work were discussed in the Governing Body on 15th January 2010. The overall scheme was approved for taking up the Streetscaping and Retrofitting work immediately.
The Governing Body in its meeting dated 4th March 2011 approved the proposed Pedestrianisation of the Chandni Chowk.
Follow up action
i) Bus parking issue within the railway premises has been discussed in the last Governing Body meeting held on 20th January 2012. Follow up actions on this issue have been taken by MCD.
W.P. (C) Nos. 4572 of 2007, 8580 of 2009 & Cont. Cas (C) 564 of 2010 Page 30 of 42ii) S.P. Mukherjee Marg circulation issues were discussed in the Governing Body and detail corrective measures identified and recommended by the WGII B were considered and approved by the Governing Body on 20th January 2012 which are being implemented by the MCD.
Observations
i) It was explained by Jt. Commissioner of Police (Traffic) that the Redevelopment plan of Chandni Chowk has not been submitted to UTTIPEC and Traffic Police and Stake holders meeting was held in Town Hall by MCD which was not successful as people had various objections.
ii) However, Commissioner, MCD explained that there was stakeholders meeting under his Chairmanship and most of the observations have already been incorporated by the consultant. Chief Secretary, had also taken a meeting. There is an issue of DJB and other agencies who are working on the laying of Service duct. The MCD should regularly interact with them and start the work for implementation of the proposal.
Decision Final version of the proposal of this project to be uploaded on the UTTIPEC Website and then MCD may have a Stakeholders meeting with the final version of the proposal so that Stakeholders are on board and the proposal is implanted."
41. Reference may also be made at this stage to the Zonal Development Plan ('ZDP') prepared by the Delhi Development Authority ('DDA') for Zone 'A' Walled City Area which was placed on record by the Petitioners on 22nd February 2013. Under point 7.6.6 concerning bicycle/cycle rickshaw it was acknowledged that the MPD-2021 had suggested use of cycles/rickshaws in specific areas of Walled City and Chandni Chowk. As per clause 12.6 (iii) of W.P. (C) Nos. 4572 of 2007, 8580 of 2009 & Cont. Cas (C) 564 of 2010 Page 31 of 42 MPD-2021 this was to be consciously planned along with pedestrianisation at the time of redevelopment scheme. It is evident from the above documents that one integral component of any plan for the redevelopment of Chandni Chowk should be the provision of lanes for NMVs, particularly cycle rickshaws.
42. On 17th January 2013, the Court passed the following order with regard to Chandni Chowk:
"Chandni Chowk Regarding Chandni Chowk, it is stated by learned counsel for UTTIPEC, the Govt. of NCT of Delhi and the SRDC, that various meetings have taken place. The minutes of the meetings of the UTTIPEC dated 27.03.2011 and 31.03.2012 were referred to. It was stated that the minutes had recorded the decision regarding pedestrianisation of Chandni Chowk. The MCD and Govt. of NCT of Delhi shall jointly place on record the final decision in this regard before the next date of hearing. They shall also indicate the time-frame within which the said decision will be implemented.
This Court was shown photographs of the current traffic situation in Chandni Chowk, especially at the entry and exit points. It is apparent that considerable bottle necks are faced by both pedestrians as well as vehicular traffic, particularly on account of the barricades placed near the temples and places of worship. Learned counsel for the Delhi Police submitted that instructions would be issued to ensure that necessary remedial action is taken which would include removal of barricades, and posting of sufficient number of policemen. He states that the Delhi Police will undertake a comprehensive review of the plan to decongest Chandni W.P. (C) Nos. 4572 of 2007, 8580 of 2009 & Cont. Cas (C) 564 of 2010 Page 32 of 42 Chowk. This would include examining whether the barricades are if at all required and to what extent.
Mr. Pradeep Sachdeva and Mr. Dalal, the consultants engaged in designing the redevelopment of Chandni Chowk are requested to remain present on the next date of hearing to apprise the Court of the possible solutions for decongesting Chandni Chowk. They may make presentations."
43. On the next date i.e. 22nd February 2013 Mr. Arun Baroka, Secretary, PWD was present in Court. After hearing the parties, the following order was passed:
"Chandni Chowk Pursuant to the previous order, Mr. Arun Baroka, Secretary, PWD, Govt. of NCT of Delhi is present in the Court. He states that pursuant to the meeting held on 04.02.2013 under the chairmanship of the Chief Minister of Delhi, the plan for redevelopment of road infrastructure in Chandni Chowk was handed-over to the Public Works Department (PWD) on account of unsatisfactory progress of the incumbent implementing agency. Copy of the minutes, furnished by the Shahjahanabad Redevelopment Corporation (SRDC) on 21.02.2013 to the PWD has been shown to the Court. The copy of letter by the SRDC dated 21.02.2013 outlining eight projects/works described specifically, has also been shown. Mr. Baroka states that within the next ten days, a meeting would be convened for considering the views and suggestions of all the stakeholders. A Coordination Committee, comprising of representatives of the agencies, would be constituted and convened within the same period. It is further stated that the agency, i.e. PWD would formulate the specifics and indicate the time-frame within which the projects would be taken up and completed. An affidavit W.P. (C) Nos. 4572 of 2007, 8580 of 2009 & Cont. Cas (C) 564 of 2010 Page 33 of 42 pursuant to such decision be filed within two weeks from today. The Coordination Committee shall take into account the views of the stake holders and concerned interested parties which may be submitted to it in writing.
Ms. Indira Unninayar, learned counsel has handed over a note on the Chandni Chowk issue which is taken on record. Copies thereof have been handed over to learned counsel for the respondents. Mr. Sanjeev Ralli, learned counsel for the Chandni Chowk Vyapar Mandal, has handed over copies of certain photographs showing the traffic condition in Chandni Chowk."
44. In the affidavit presented to the Court by Mr. Baroka on that date nothing was said about the Chandni Chowk. On 21st March 2013, the CCVM filed documents enclosing the submissions made by it to the PWD on 4th March 2013. The gist of the said submissions was as under:
(i) The provisions of MPD-2021 and Zonal Plan of Walled City should be kept in mind by the authorities while making any plan and policy in relation to the movement and parking of motorised and NMVs in Chandni Chowk including the main arterial road from Lal Quila to Fatehpuri Masjid.
(ii) The MPD-2021 had to be read with the Zonal plan for Chandni Chowk.
The Zonal plan showed that different streets and roads of Chandni Chowk have been earmarked for the movements of different types of motorised and NMVs. In the Zonal plan on the arterial road starting from Lal Quila upto Fateh Puri Masjid the movements of NMVs including rickshaw was not W.P. (C) Nos. 4572 of 2007, 8580 of 2009 & Cont. Cas (C) 564 of 2010 Page 34 of 42 provided whereas it has been provided in other streets and locations of Chandni Chowk.
(iii) The notification dated 25th May 2007 prohibiting movement of rickshaws in Chandni Chowk between 8 a.m. to 8 p.m. is not struck down by the Full Bench in the judgment dated 10th February 2010. It was only directed that the matter should be reviewed by the concerned authorities.
(iv) NMV lanes on both sides of Chandni Chowk have been built and tried thrice in the past 15 years but every time the enforcement of the same could not be implemented successfully.
(v) A detailed study done by CRRI in January 2005 titled 'Transport Systems Management for Chandni Chowk' deserves to be considered by the Coordination Committee while making any plan or policy for Chandni Chowk area.
(vi) The operationalisation of the Parade Ground Parking by 31st March 2013 was very important. The integrated developments of H C Sen Marg and Esplanade Roads should also be done alongwith main Chandni Chowk for proper traffic circulation.
(vii) The garbage dump/Dhalao at Fountain be shifted away from the main arterial road as it is a major cause of traffic congestion.
(viii) Illegal encroachments in the form of defunct and completely idle and non-operational police chowkis/posts and other structures should be removed as the same add to the miseries of traffic congestion.
W.P. (C) Nos. 4572 of 2007, 8580 of 2009 & Cont. Cas (C) 564 of 2010 Page 35 of 42(ix) Pavements blockades and encroachments by religious institutions on arterial road and Fountain ought to be removed.
(x) MCD (North) should provide parking bays for thelas on the Bagh Deewar side to facilitate loading and unloading for wholesale trade.
45. On 21st March 2013 the Executive Engineer PWD stated that a meeting of the Coordination Committee had been convened on 28th February 2013. For the purpose of smooth functioning and continuity the representatives of all stake holders were requested to send the names and details of nodal officers of their concerned departments. A schedule of the tasks to be undertaken with the time lines ending with the commencement of the work was enclosed as Annexure A-1 to the affidavit. In terms thereof the initial task of engagement of consultants, survey of existing civic utilities, finalization of specifications and rates of non-schedule items, finalization of Master plans, administrative approvals and expenditure sanctions, relocation of transformers, working drawings, tendering process and schematic design for surrounding roads was to be completed by 16th September 2013 and work was to commence on 15th January 2014.
46. At the hearing on 25th April 2013, the Court required the GNCTD to specifically place before it on the next date all the decisions taken pursuant to the previous orders "regarding finalisation of the plan for Chandni Chowk, based on the decisions of the UTTIPEC, and any further modifications thereto". The decisions that were taken in the meetings of the Coordination W.P. (C) Nos. 4572 of 2007, 8580 of 2009 & Cont. Cas (C) 564 of 2010 Page 36 of 42 Committee in the form of minutes of meetings were also asked to be produced.
47. At the hearing on 29th April 2013, the Court was handed over an affidavit sworn to by Mr. Radhey Shyam Garg, Executive Engineer, PWD. Annexed to this affidavit were the minutes of the meeting held on 12th March 2013 between the PWD, SRDC, DJB and Delhi Police. The affidavit stated that the BSES Yamuna Power Limited (BYPL) had informed that out of the 15 sub- stations in Chandni Chowk, six had been shifted during 2010-2011. However it was technically not feasible to shift the remaining sub-stations to alternative sites.
48. Annexed to the affidavit is also an inspection report which earmarks specific tasks to the MCD and the DJB to find solution to the problem of shifting of the sub-stations. The Court would not like the authorities to put their hands up on the question of relocation of the sub-stations. There has to be a solution found since some of these transformers are indeed creating a problem. These include the sub-stations at Gali Paratha Wali, Moti Bazar, Katra Pyare Lal, Shri Ram & Sons Pandit Brothers, New Krishna Market, Katra Neel, Kuchha Ghasi Ram and Bata sub-station. A solution will have to be found in consultation with the North Delhi Municipal Corporation ('NDMC') so that the redevelopment plan can be executed.
49. In para 3 of the affidavit it is stated as under:
"3. As regards direction of the Hon'ble High Court to submit the plan as approved by UTTIPEC and the plan W.P. (C) Nos. 4572 of 2007, 8580 of 2009 & Cont. Cas (C) 564 of 2010 Page 37 of 42 which is proposed to be executed in phase-1 is enclosed as Annexure-3.
It is respectfully submitted that on detailed examination of the plan as approved by UTTIPEC, it emerged that executing this plan may lead to great public inconvenience and hardship to the people. Converting half of the carriageway to pedestrian Plaza & stopping all motorized traffic may cause problems to the public as has been observed in the works of similar nature undertaken elsewhere in the city in the recent past.
Accordingly, it has been decided to implement the scheme in two phases. Phase-I will comprise of making all services underground, up-gradation of the footpath using rich specification, providing street light of heritage type and carpeting of the road and part development of plazas on this road. Phase-II involving full pedestrianization would be taken up based on the success and public response of phase-I."
50. The Court has been shown by Mr. Baroka a cross-sectional street plan dated nil April 2013 prepared by Mr. Abhimanyu Dalal, Architect. It shows in, the proposals approved by the UTTIPEC and the Delhi Urban Arts Commission ('DUAC'), the earlier proposal by Mr. Dalal and what has now been decided by the PWD. As was earlier noted, what was earlier proposed and approved by the UTTIPEC was a 15 m pedestrian pathway on one side and the carriageway in the middle being reserved for only buses and NMVs. The bus lane would be 2.3 meters on either side of the 3.9 m NMV lane. On the other end of the road, there would be a dead zone building arcade. On the W.P. (C) Nos. 4572 of 2007, 8580 of 2009 & Cont. Cas (C) 564 of 2010 Page 38 of 42 either side there would be a 6.5 m pedestrian pathway. All the overhead cables and lines would be taken underground.
51. In the proposal now prepared by the PWD, the above plan appears to have been changed. What is proposed is a 7.5 m pedestrian pathway on either side and 7 m carriage way on either side. Upon enquiry, Mr. Baroka informed to the Court that the proposal was to allow all forms of traffic on the 7 m carriageways. The view of the PWD is that a restriction of the carriageway to only two forms of traffic viz., buses and NMVs would result in chaos. Upon further questioning, Mr. Baroka disclosed that this decision was taken at a meeting chaired by the Chief Minister of Delhi.
52. It is surprising that the decision plans approved at the meetings of the STF and UTTIPEC should now be reversed at a meeting of the PWD of the GNCTD. Any redevelopment plan has to be prepared on the basis of a empirical data and in consultation with experts. The very purpose of the Court requiring an STF to be constituted was to take on board conflicting points of view and interests and resolve issues in a democratic manner. As in the case of NMV lanes, here again a decision arrived at through a democratic process is sought to be set at nought by a unilateral decision at a different level of decision making. This sets at nought the very purpose of having a consultative and participative decision making process involving all interest groups. The Court does not sit in appeal over the final decision of the administrative authority as to the best possible manner in which an area should be redeveloped. However, the Court can examine the fairness and reasonableness of the decision making process. If the process is such that W.P. (C) Nos. 4572 of 2007, 8580 of 2009 & Cont. Cas (C) 564 of 2010 Page 39 of 42 every interested group is permitted to participate then the decision arrived at by that process must be respected. To recall, in the present case the Court had constituted an STF. Interestingly, UTTIPEC was also a body that had representation of all interest groups. The UTTIPEC headed by the LG takes decisions collectively. The decision of the collective should not be permitted to be overturned unilaterally by an authority at a different level in the hierarchy. If such authority feels that the decision needs to be re-looked at, then it should place the matter again before the larger body comprising experts and all interest groups
53. This Court was informed at the hearing on 22nd April 2013 that the task of execution of the redevelopment plan for Chandni Chowk had reverted from SRDC to PWD. This, however, does not mean that PWD would reverse the decisions taken earlier as to the redevelopment plan for Chandni Chowk. The PWD was meant to implement the redevelopment plan and not rework it without reverting to the larger body that approved the redevelopment plan.
54. The CCVM is right that due weight should be given to the previous reports of the CRRI as well as the ZDP prepared by the DDA. There does appear to be some variation in what was suggested and approved by UTTIPEC and what is suggested in the ZDP prepared by the DDA. The ZDP permits rickshaws in lanes leading to the main Chandni Chowk arterial road and not on the Chandni Chowk itself. On the other hand, the UTTIPEC approved plan envisages NMV lanes on Chandni Chowk. These two plans require to be reconciled. The CRRI report shows that there is extensive use of the Chandni Chowk arterial road by shoppers who travel on cycle rickshaws W.P. (C) Nos. 4572 of 2007, 8580 of 2009 & Cont. Cas (C) 564 of 2010 Page 40 of 42 throughout the day. Clearly, the so-called ban imposed on movement of rickshaws on Chandni Chowk between 8 a.m. and 8 p.m. by the notification dated 25th May 2007 has not worked. Rightly, the DTP seeks withdrawal of the said notification till such time the traffic on Chandni Chowk is not re- worked. The Court declines therefore to allow the prayer of CCVM and issue any direction for enforcement of the said notification. Given the current usage of the main Chandni Chowk arterial road, reserving exclusive NMV lanes for rickshaws is imperative. The suggestion of the DTP to keep them out of the Chandni Chowk arterial road deserves to be rejected since it is contrary to the plan proposed by UTTIPEC and the DUAC. The UTTIPEC being the expert body headed by the LG and with the STF having recommended in its report the adoption of the SDG prepared by the UTTIPEC, this Court directs that all authorities should work to implement the plan for the redevelopment of Chandni Chowk redevelopment as approved by the UTTIPEC and the DUAC. The plan should be tried out for at least one year before any further changes which are sought to be made.
55. The concern expressed by CCVM as regards the parking facility for motorised vehicles requires to be accounted for. The Court had been passing directions from time to time as regards the Parade Ground parking facility. It has now been pointed out that the multi-level parking would be made operational by 15th May 2013.
56. The other point made regarding redevelopment/regulating the traffic on the lanes leading to Chandni Chowk also requires to be examined. The UTTIPEC as well as the STF will hold a joint meeting on this aspect and W.P. (C) Nos. 4572 of 2007, 8580 of 2009 & Cont. Cas (C) 564 of 2010 Page 41 of 42 come up with concrete proposal for execution by the PWD in a time bound manner.
57. The Court, therefore, does not permit the PWD to change the redevelopment plan for Chandni Chowk approved by UTTIPEC unless the said suggestion by the PWD is again placed before the UTTIPEC and the STF for approval. This would avoid multiplicity of various decision-making authorities working on the same issue at cross purposes. Whatever suggestions the PWD wishes to make should be placed before both UTTIPEC and STF and a decision be taken collectively. For this purpose a joint meeting of STF, UTTIPEC, PWD and DTP will be convened by the LG within the next four weeks. The CCVM as well as the representatives of each of the Petitioners as well as the DDA will be invited to the meeting as special invitees. They are permitted to present their proposals at the joint meeting. The joint meeting will also deliberate on each of the suggestions put forth by the CCVM which have been set out in para 44 above as well as the ZDP and the January 2005 report of the CRRI. Consecutive joint meetings of the STF and UTTIPEC be held till a workable redevelopment plan is put in place.
S. RAVINDRA BHAT, J.
S. MURALIDHAR, J.
MAY 24, 2013 dn W.P. (C) Nos. 4572 of 2007, 8580 of 2009 & Cont. Cas (C) 564 of 2010 Page 42 of 42